About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14
to pyongyang. press articles hail the fact that china in anticipation of the recent launch had begun inspecting cargo on north korean ships in search of contraband. the question this raises is why has chi gnat not been inspecting north korean ships since 2006 as called for in a u.n. resolution, reinforced by another resolution in 2009. if u.n. member states would only enforce the sanctions currently on the books, north korea would be unable to ignore the swer national community and the civilized world. the time for coordinated international action is now. the time, in fact, is long overdue. with that, mr. speakering i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the squom from florida reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. berman is recognized. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.con.res. 145 as amended and yield myself such time as i may consume. sproy the gentleman is recognized. mr. berman: i would like to thank the sponsor of this legislation, ms. ros-lehtinen, for her leadership on this issue and her work in addressing the north korean threa
also have an economic competitor and a partner in china. they have a voracious appetite for natural resources and we're looking at new ways to get these in our own backyard, and maybe i will ask you this question, admiral. how important is the china factor in america energy program's going forward? >> i will talk to doubt, but i would like to mention a few puffs things about this report that may not have come out in your opening remarks. we definitely advocating opening of drilling in the united states where we cannot, but there is a very strong part of this report that says it has to be done safely and we know how to do it safely. that is one contribution of those of us who have served in the armed forces, we do a lot of dangerous stuff in the armed forces, fuel, nuclear power, explosives. the way we do that safely is a high standards, rigid enforcement, and very professional inspectors to do it. we strongly recommend applying this model to regulatory body so that we can do this safely, so that we can do oil retractions safely. that we can do safely. the general and i live in penns
with this, the british, the french, the germans, russia, china, they all tend to view this as a proliferation problem. the conversation between iran and the other side tends to be about that issue, very narrowly focused. to kind of move that conversation, you have to figure out a different kind of architecture. the five plus one process, as such, is designed to deal with the corporation issue and the composition is that has to do with the iranian violation of the mpt and there have been 62 -- six security council resolutions that suggests sanctions. there are two countries who suggest that the issue between -- that this is not a proliferation issue but has to do with the character of the regime and one of them is israel who does not view this as strictly an arms dispute and the second one is iran who similarly suggests that although it is an arms control issue, they are really using arms control as a way to undermine the regime. there are two actors in this particular conflagration who are not accepting the argument being that this is about nuclear infractions as oppo
working actively in china to buy european- american-chinese goods. the government is not completed, but they're not doing enough. we're thinking that pressure needs to be brought on china. goods made in germany, sold by that company to the chinese company that thinks it will keep it in china, but in fact it is going to iran. all it a country of tr concern. we're thinking maybe it is time that china is called out on that. china needs to be pressured to stop a local in the system internationally that is being created to keep iran from outfitting its centrifuge program. that effort over time has had tremendous success. with more and more sanctions, it is been more successful. more purchases stopped, more interdiction's, more trouble for iran to make progress. >> in terms of u.s. non- proliferation programs, david is emphasizing some of the holes that exist, particularly in controls and lack of enforcement of existing sanctions legislation. what is your assessment of non- proliferation programs? >> when you hear discussions on sanctions, these are the things we tried to do to cut off s
. what if everyone in china had two cars and a swimming pool? that is not sustainable. the reason we cannot make any political progress is we have this cognitive dissonance. at the beginning of the session assayed save your money and consume more. at the same time. amazing. we have got to get beyond an economy that is predicated on unlimited, increasing amounts of consumption was no end in sight. the end is in sight. maybe if we have to cope with the reality for awhile longer, we can be more intelligent. >> on that note, we have to wrap up. one of the things that intrigued me with these kinds of situations is that ideas are very -- is very scarce resource and we have to think about maximizing and amplifying ideas. that is so incredible. the idea of possibility is so, i think, important to celebrate. when i say possibility, if people say you cannot do that and cannot do this and cannot think that, people are like -- there is a [inaudible] at work. we have to rebuild a new economy. above all, the fact that you're right. if we do not do it the planet will do it for us. i will leave it a
, close to china, or is it just for the 50 states. guest: a really good question they apply to of the federated territories as well and for some of the grant programs there are statutory minimum amounts that have to be provided for the different territories. join the conversation and talked to david maurer about a homeland security grants to states, here are the numbers to call. what formula did the grant programs follow went looking to get out the money? what do they have to do? guest: it varies from program to program, but generally speaking, as a first cut, dhs takes into consideration the risk. in other words, it wants to provide the money more toward portions of the country where there is a greater risk of attack or natural disaster. secondly, we look at capabilities. how capable are the state and local governments already. those that are less capable should get additional funding. and third, they look of the types of project that they are applying for. one of the interesting thing about the third step isthe state and local governments do not apply untypically for speci
is broke. china owns us and we are sending our young men and our money to afghanistan and we're going to cut programs right here in america for the american people. . the american people need to put the pressure on congress to bring our troops home now and not wait until december of 2014. mr. speaker, i assure you if we start bringing them home in december of 2014, it will become 2015 and it will become 2016 and how many more families have to cry about their loved ones being killed in a war that has no end to it? mr. speaker, today i would like to submit for the record, i will ask unanimous consent the names of 28 american service members who have been killed in the last few weeks. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, again i ask the people to look at this poster and realize that this war is costing us in so many, many ways. the most important our young men and women who are dying. if you agree with me that we need to bring our troops home before the current december 2014 deadline, please go to www.bringthemhome201.com, and sign the petition. mr. speaker, i have been to walter reed an
. host: the stories are "the in- sourcing boom" and "mr. china comes to america. both can be found at theatlantic.com. thanks for joining us. we will take you live to the house floor. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., december 19, 2012. i hereby appoint the honorable daniel webster to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed to s. res. 624, relative to the death of the honorable daniel k. inouye, senator from the state of ohio. -- hawaii. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of
china is a big user. it is like any commodity. host: mr. sieminski, what are the major renewable energy source available to be developed in the eastern u.s., and how do we get them to get started? guest: the eastern united states energy resources, in the east coast of the u.s., we now have discovered there is a lot of natural gas. it basically starts in west virginia and runs up into pennsylvania and up into new york state. if we go back the last 100 years, pennsylvania and west virginia have been big producers of coal in the u.s. the oil industry started, the first well was drilled in pennsylvania back in 1859. the wind resources along the east coast, are being developed as well pro. probably the most exciting thing being developed in the east coast is a possibility there --uld b host: on the same question of what is out there, what is the u.s. energy independence status if all the offshore oil and anwar are included? guest: it goes to the answer that frank gave. all of the oil in the united states does not belong to the federal government. oil offshore generally falls under the federa
want to start off with 9/11, syria, china and the 20 children. three examples, 9/11, syria, people assassinated. i need to understand why you diminished someone's comments with regard to the second amendment and the purpose of that. you have a master's degree. i don't understand. that said rather than being critical. the reality is horrible situation that happened. i don't defend anything that happened at the school, but that said, the individual going into a school with a shotgun, that said we could come back to the 1994 democratic vote. senator feinstein introduced the bill and you guys lost although h lost. i'll stop right there. those are three examples and i invite the listeners to look at the china situation in less than a week ago where ears, arms and fingers were cut off. what say you. guest: we do live in a society where we do feel protected and represented in government. i think that is something that maybe has diminished in the sense of the governments there. we do have a representative democracy and something we should be very, very proud of. and compare us to countries
is the head line at "the washington post" fed page. josh hicks reports -- guest: i just got back from china, and we talked about the electoral college there, and a state that have a problem with freedom, you know, and democracy. they can't figure it out. i tried to explain to them and they still wonder why do we still have this if we were this representative democracy and the people have their way. very interesting. host: how did you answer the question? guest: i tried to explain the foundation. the fact we have federalism and states have power and in this particular case it is the power to select a president. they did not want congress to do it. but they still cannot buy it, i don't think. host: on twitter -- asking to explain the historical justification and why do we need it now. guest: the justification for it at the founding was they did not want congress to make the selection of the president. they wanted to take away from the capital where maybe chicanery would occur and people would do deals. they wanted it to respect federalism, a federal election rather than a national legend. it
plan b. plan b is not the way to go unless we are trying to get in second place to countries like china and others. if we want to stay in the lead, we need to get our fiscal house in order and reject this plan b. the speaker pro tempore: all time on the democratic side has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin has two minutes remaining. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, let's take a step back and remind us where we are. on january 1, if we do nothing, every american taxpayer will see a massive tax increase. that will dramatically hurt our economy and families. the next day, we'll face a 10% cut in our defense budget. americans chose divided government. whether it was intended or not. the president won. the house is still a republican house. we are going to have to find a way to make this work. this is what we are intending on doing today. we want to avert this crisis, this cliff. but that means beginning to get spending under control. that means to prevent as many tax increases hitting as many americans as possible. i mean this sincerely, my friend from maryland says we need a balanced approach. t
going to compete with china with 1.3 billion people? the answer is we can have the entire world at our disposal by creating conditions that the best people in the wormed can come to the united states and study. >> and stay and start businesses. >> two, then we have to focus on faction, particularly the corporate tax reform, to get a system which is simpler and promotes efficiency and makes it easier for businesses to compete if the world. third, then we have to -- that will create -- that will be enormous. third, then there is a infrastructure investment that needs to be made. this is very important because in the context of the kiped of budget deal we'll get where we'll spend less going forward as businesses, we have to think about what our values are with respect to what we'll spend money on. the most important things we can spend money on is infrastructure to again create -- make investments in the future rather than just short-term spending. and then twin that with important support for research, basic research, and for higher education as drew talked about. and for education. thos
not had -- food cards. stamps.t had food since china and russia when to communism because of starvation, it would be best to keep people do not have much money. one of the questions that i wanted to guess is you're not given any costs or payments -- let's see a mother or a child on food cards. how much per month do they get? according to my computer, they would not get enough to eat very well. host: thank you. guest: so, for a family of four, let's say, two adults, two children, the maximum benefit for a family of four would be $670 per month. it is in low-cost diet. that is why we likely see a lot of use of these programs along with other assistance. the caller is right that it is not the supplemental nutrition assistance program -- now the supplemental nutrition assistance program, but these are electronic benefitcards. host: as you deal with these issues, you also deal with obesity because often these families are eating less than healthy food or fast food. guest: that is true. it is complicating when you try to talk about them together. it is important that you remember that many of
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)